Subject: S-7-31-99  

Date:    03/15/2000 1:35 PM
     
     
Dear Arthur Levitt:
     
The issue is true third party research.  We tiny little investors will pay 
analysts for research reports.  Selective disclosure of material facts to 
favorite analysts indirectly enriches the corporate officers at the expense 
of the small shareholders.  The release of information in a broad and fair 
way is the only acceptable option to small people.  We need to be protected 
from analysts who say, "we have done no underwriting for this company" but 
are secretly hoping to participate in the next big round of new financing.
     
Make no mistake about it.  We will still pay for and receive analyst's 
reports.  But it is likely that the current folks doing the work will not 
be the recipients of those research dollars for the obvious conflict of 
interest reasons stated above.  Everyone I know prefers sources of 
information from disinterested third parties such as Value Line just to 
mention one.  But currently there are too few independents to choose from. 
Who can really challenge the insider folks at the big name brokerage 
houses.  If you level this playing field the proliferation of third party 
analysts will replace the vacuum left by the well connected "suspicious" 
analysts.
     
Selective disclosure of material facts must be ended, eliminated, and 
stopped.
     
Mark Mears
Independent Small Investor,
Employed at a State University in Illinois. 
I have 12 holdings currently.
Last year I purchased shares twice and sold nothing.
This year I have traded once and still have sold nothing.
My retirement plan with the University System is self managed.